anyone in Havant?

That's more-or-less what my teacher said. Except not quite in the same
words. She was of the era & type for whom there was no greater pleasure
than reading Pride & Sodding Prej.

I seem to have managed it quite easily, though. I may not have taken the
paper entirely seriously.

 

No. It's on the drive.

Sure - there's mine outside and a selection from the neighbours - any
preference?

 

I hear that young Mr Chipping was a jolly good egg

 

Speaking from personal experience of being employed and being part of
the employment process, the only difference is stereotyping.

There are many people in positions of power who insist upon a degree
(or even MBA) featuring on a CV. This means that excellent (and often,
the best) candidates are overlooked, purely because an administrator
puts the CV directly into the "no" pile, based on the fuddy duddy
hiring managers insistance on a degree.

This is especially prevalent when the economy is an employers market.

Should you manage to get past the interviewer and into they 'maybe'
pile, there's a good chance you'll get filtered out now, or later, if
there is an equally skilled person with a degree.

But you know what? That hiring manager was going to be a pain to work
for anyway.

So, for those of us without university educations, pitching to
traditional establishments, it's essential that the CV goes beyond what
the competition is able to provide and to be able to talk the game the
same way as a degreed person would.

The interesting part, is when dealing with non-traditional
organisations, where having a strong CV without Uni education can be
seen as better, because you can actually do what you say you can,
rather than simply knowing the theory. This has been my game plan and
thus far has served me well - earning this year, the same as my former
(double degree plus Kellogg MBA) boss did two years ago.

I've also worked for/with people with multiple degrees (the most was 4)
and multiple MBA's who were utterly useless and borderline incompetant,
but were hired on the strength of their education and ability to talk
the talk. In every case, all of them were 'managed out' of the business.

 

I managed it.

I was ok in my mocks and got B but when it came to the proper exam it
all went slightly wrong.

That's where I fucked up.

I was fine on the Shakespeare & Chaucer bollocks but I didn't quite
understand that Wilfred Owen wasn't Biggles in disguise.

My English lit teacher wanted me to appeal against my grade because
he'd expected me to get either an A or a B but I knew *exactly* where
I'd gone wrong and he didn't. Having a job in the bag before I took my
'O' levels wasn't exactly a good way to encourage me to try in the
exams.

 

Well yes but from your accounts of her here she is also half way to
being resident in a loony bin. Are we therefore supposed to be
surprised about her lack of understanding of language structure?

 

I was fortunate to have a very old fashioned English teacher and an old
fashioned French teacher in my middle school. They both taught using
language structure for which I am grateful given I have an interest in
languages. In one English language test (before O Level time) I scored
99% and someone else in the class scored 1%. Talk about extremes of
achievement.

You complain about English lit - some of us did French literature as
part of our French A Level course. From memory it was Candide by
Voltaire and Vol de Nuit by Saint Exupery (I may have the spelling a bit
mangled - it was a long time ago!).

 

Fucking love that book. In English, anyway.

 

Candide and Pere Goriot for me.